The City of Kirksville is poised to enact protections for sexual orientation with the City Council expected to vote Monday on the creation of a human rights commission that would hear complaints of discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation.

The result of months of debate and effort on the part of Missourians for Equality, a political action committee with local roots, the Council expressed a split opinion in favor of passage of the proposed ordinance and moved forward with placing the matter on Monday's Council meeting agenda.

Modeled after similar ordinances in Kirkwood and Columbia, the ordinance would make it illegal to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation, perceived or true, and offer protections currently not present in state or federal laws. Similar ordinances are also in place in Kansas City, St. Louis and statewide in Iowa and Illinois.

Previously, Missourians for Equality Director and former Truman State student body President Aaron Malin had appealed to the Council multiple times to consider the measure which would create a nine-member commission to investigate allegations of discrimination based on ancestry, color, disability, economic status, gender, gender identity, marital status, national origin, race, religion or sexual orientation.

Sexual orientation is the focus of the proposal and specific protections not currently covered in either local, state or federal discrimination laws. Currently in Missouri, and according to federal law, a person can be fired for being gay, or straight, for that matter, or a local business could hang a sign that states "Gays need not apply."

"Individuals should have the right to be secure in their homes and place of employment without fear they will be fired or evicted because of who they love," Malin said.

The Council discussed the proposal at its study session June 17 and, after having previously declined to consider the matter at least twice, expressed a majority desire to move forward with a vote at its next meeting.

"I think it's wrong to say, 'You can't come down and sit down in my restaurant because you're gay. You can't ride the bus because you're black. You can't have alcohol because you're Indian,'" said Council member Bob Russell. "These are things we've developed as human beings on this Earth. We've made this what it is today. We need to correct it. That's my thing here and I'll stand by that."

Russell is standing as the hinge vote on the matter, with fellow Council members Glen Mortiz and Jerry Mills in favor of the measure while Mayor Richard Detweiler and member Roger Edge opposed. Russell had previously questioned whether the measure was necessary, citing a belief months ago that the U.S. Constitution offered protections for all people.

During the June 17 study session, City Attorney Howard Hickman clarified the matter, confirming that there are no federal laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in housing, employment or public accommodation.

Page 2 of 3 - Kirksville does currently have some measure of protection in its fair housing ordinance, having voted several years ago to include sexual orientation in its protected classes and the city does include sexual orientation as protected in its hiring practices but that does not currently extend to private businesses.

It was the topic of private businesses that presented an apparent hang-up for Detweiler, who stated he believed the measure is "not needed."

"I don't want business people to think there is one more thing that they're going to have to deal with if they come and do business in Kirksville," he said. "I don't want business to be afraid they're going to be sued or go to jail."

Jail could be a possibility, as outlined in state statutes on municipal ordinance violations, with any violations of city ordinances that do not specify a punishment resulting in a fine of up to $500 or 90 days in jail.

"I think at the very least, you need to pull out the part about going to jail over this," Detweiler said. "That's wrong."

City Manager Mari Macomber noted during the discussion that as currently outlined, city ordinances allow for a similar fine or jail sentence for a noise ordinance violation like a dog barking. Detweiler expressed a similar opinion, saying he didn't believe jail time was appropriate for such violations.

"I just don't agree," he said.

After Mills offered the hypothetical of a business passing over Kirksville due to the lack of such protections, Detweiler conceded that at that time, he would be in favor of such a measure.

"What if a business does come in, a big factory, a big business comes in and says, 'Look we're going to hire 400 people,' and they say, 'You don't have this,' and they say, 'We support gays or whatever their situation is but because you don't have it, we're going to take it to Kirkwood because they do have it.' If they're open to the situation, we have to broaden ourselves too," Mills said.

In response, Detweiler said "at that point I would."

The proposal outlines not only the creation of a volunteer commission, with its members to be appointed by City Council, but also the process a complaint or allegation would go through, including initially being addressed by the city's appointed compliance officer, most likely the city manager or assistant city manager.

If the matter could not be resolved by the compliance officer, it would be considered and investigated by the full commission, which would strive to come to a resolution at that point. If the matter persisted, it could be referred to the city attorney who, at his discretion, could take the alleged discriminator to municipal court.

Council members had previously expressed concern about opening local businesses and individuals up for prosecution or lawsuits while Macomber said during her research and interaction with Kirkwood and Columbia that the number of complaints had been relatively few.

Page 3 of 3 - She said Columbia had reported eight to 12 cases a year, with the majority being resolved with assistance by mediators from University of Missouri Law School while Kirkwood's relatively new commission had not heard any complaints. Columbia has had its ordinance in place since 1983.

Macomber said possible outreach and education provisions within the proposal could take significant amounts of city staff time and advised the Council consider dropping those portions to make for a more easily-enacted ordinance.

According to Macomber, Columbia had reported devoting up to 30 hours a week on such outreach, education and addressing complaints.

Referring to those time commitments during discussion, Edge said he believed the measure would be an undue burden on local resources.

"I recommend the City Council drop this issue because of time involved and cost factor and more labors on our city attorney," he said.

Hickman responded that the matter would not involve any more time of his office than a typical codes violation.

The matter is being taken up as the U.S. Supreme Court delivered opinions Wednesday on the first-ever cases of gay marriage, according to the Associated Press, and as Malin and Missourians for Equality push for a ballot measure in 2014 that would provide similar protections across the state.

Before the Supreme Court were California's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denies legally married gay couples a range of tax, health and pension benefits otherwise available to married couples.

Those DOMA provisions were ruled unconstitutional, while the court ruled there were no grounds for an initial appeal on a trial court's earlier ruling that California's Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. The high court's decision left that original ruling in place and invalidated California's same-sex marriage ban.

Malin said the initiative petition effort was ramping up with volunteers across the state working to gather approximately 105,000 petition signatures in order to have the measure on the November 2014 ballot for Missourians' consideration.

"It's a very basic civil rights issue," he said. "The idea individuals should not be terminated or denied housing or kicked out of public parks because they're gay, lesbian or transgender, it's a very basic civil rights concept. [...] This should have been addressed a long time ago."